Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gnome Foundation Welcomes Holly Million as Executive Director

foundation.gnome.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 53 posts

Re: Gnome Foundation Welcomes Holly Million as Executive Director

#41

Post by josteink »

kbrosnan wrote: post #19
nvm0n2 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gonna be another Mozilla, it seems?

I know it is cool to hate on Mitchell Baker here. Lack of qualifications is not a valid criticism. She has a law degree from Berkley. Passed the California bar exam in '87. Was a high ranking lawyer in Netscape as their first legal hire. Designed the Mozilla Public License. Created the Mozilla Foundation. She has been in executive roles for 20-30 years.

> Lack of qualifications is not a valid criticism.

On the contrary I would consider that the absolutely most justified, objective criticism one could find.

But then I’m one of those guys who thinks DEI (as preached by today’s social activists) is horseshit, and I think meritocracy is a good thing.

I’m not sure how those things are seen from within, by people more left leaning than me.

Re: Gnome Foundation Welcomes Holly Million as Executive Director

#42

Post by josteink »

FireBeyond wrote: post #29
throwawa14223 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "Safety versus Comfort" section indicates they do not intend to apply the above sections above fairly.

I am having a hard time digesting that section too: > "Reverse"-isms, including "reverse racism," "reverse sexism," and "cisphobia" ... The examples listed above are not against the Code of Conduct. That in itself is a little 'wow'. > Basic expectations for conduct are not covered by the "reverse-ism clause" and would be enforced irrespective of the demographics of those involved. For example, racial discrimination w…

Everyone outside San Francisco thinks this is problematic.

But we are banned and censored in a systemic fashion on most social media (Twitter/X being the one, big exception), and labeled “alt right” trolls … or racists, and everyone on the left is ok with censorship being applied upon those views.

Re: Gnome Foundation Welcomes Holly Million as Executive Director

#43

Post by prokoudine »

phkahler wrote: post #9
civilitty wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Finally someone to blame for GTK4 and Gnome Shell!

>> Finally someone to blame for GTK4 and Gnome Shell! Having looked at moving from GTK3 to 4, I can understand the frustration. I also read a bunch of stuff and have concluded there are good reasons for the disruption, from making things more generic which allows new combinations of widgets (like images in menus) to allowing stuff to be in a different process. That does not mean the migration or support for doing it…

That said, glad to see you working on the GTK4 port.

Re: Gnome Foundation Welcomes Holly Million as Executive Director

#44

Post by shadowgovt »

nvm0n2 wrote: post #27
kbrosnan wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know it is cool to hate on Mitchell Baker here. Lack of qualifications is not a valid criticism. She has a law degree from Berkley. Passed the California bar exam in '87. Was a high ranking lawyer in Netscape as their first legal hire. Designed the Mozilla Public License. Created the Mozilla Foundation. She has been in executive roles for 20-30 years.

Who said anything about qualifications? She is a terrible CEO because she knows nothing about web browsers, and clearly couldn't care less about her companies products. Why would anyone ever make a lawyer a CEO of anything except a law firm? It's a self evidently terrible idea and the results are exactly what you'd expect.

Leadership's extensive knowledge of web browsers hasn't exactly been the silver bullet to guarantee Mozilla's future, given past performance. Technological superiority is less relevant when your opponents are monopolists who are making deals with each other to interlock their hardware and software.

Perhaps in a world where the largest threats to Mozilla's survival as a company are corporate maneuvering and deal making, a lawyer is the best CEO to choose by meritocracy argument.

Re: Gnome Foundation Welcomes Holly Million as Executive Director

#45

Post by pseudalopex »

josteink wrote: post #41
kbrosnan wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know it is cool to hate on Mitchell Baker here. Lack of qualifications is not a valid criticism. She has a law degree from Berkley. Passed the California bar exam in '87. Was a high ranking lawyer in Netscape as their first legal hire. Designed the Mozilla Public License. Created the Mozilla Foundation. She has been in executive roles for 20-30 years.

> Lack of qualifications is not a valid criticism. On the contrary I would consider that the absolutely most justified, objective criticism one could find. But then I’m one of those guys who thinks DEI (as preached by today’s social activists) is horseshit, and I think meritocracy is a good thing. I’m not sure how those things are seen from within, by people more left leaning than me.

What qualifications did she lack?

Re: Gnome Foundation Welcomes Holly Million as Executive Director

#46

Post by FireBeyond »

josteink wrote: post #42
FireBeyond wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am having a hard time digesting that section too: > "Reverse"-isms, including "reverse racism," "reverse sexism," and "cisphobia" ... The examples listed above are not against the Code of Conduct. That in itself is a little 'wow'. > Basic expectations for conduct are not covered by the "reverse-ism clause" and would be enforced irrespective of the demographics of those involved. For example, racial discrimination w…

Everyone outside San Francisco thinks this is problematic. But we are banned and censored in a systemic fashion on most social media (Twitter/X being the one, big exception), and labeled “alt right” trolls … or racists, and everyone on the left is ok with censorship being applied upon those views.

For grand irony, I am very left wing (socialize healthcare and education, de-escalate/demilitarize police, etc., etc.), and think the above is problematic.

Re: Gnome Foundation Welcomes Holly Million as Executive Director

#47

Post by ploum »

segphault wrote: post #38
not_your_vase wrote: post #3

Why did they feel it necessary to have such a role? I mean Gnome is one of the oldest OSS projects, and has been functioning reasonably well in the past 20-some years without it (as a project at least, I mean. I don't want to go into DE-preferences). The post announcing the job opening doesn't make me smarter unfortunately.

This is not a new role, previous GNOME Foundation executive directors include Stormy Peters, Karen Sandler, and most recently Neil McGovern.

At the time, I interacted with both Stormy Peters and Karen Sandler during my GNOME time. Their work was really positive and really appreciated. During their time, their was no debate and everybody agreed that the money spent to pay them was money well spent.

(I don’t want to dismiss Neil McGovern but I simply have no experience working with him).

Re: Gnome Foundation Welcomes Holly Million as Executive Director

#48

Post by bitwize »

FireBeyond wrote: post #29
throwawa14223 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "Safety versus Comfort" section indicates they do not intend to apply the above sections above fairly.

I am having a hard time digesting that section too: > "Reverse"-isms, including "reverse racism," "reverse sexism," and "cisphobia" ... The examples listed above are not against the Code of Conduct. That in itself is a little 'wow'. > Basic expectations for conduct are not covered by the "reverse-ism clause" and would be enforced irrespective of the demographics of those involved. For example, racial discrimination w…

The idea is that racist remarks against, say, black people carry an implicit threat of harm, whereas racist remarks against whites do not because white people hold the reins of power. Hence, verbal racism against black people threatens their safety whereas verbal racism against white people only threatens their comfort. Implicit in this is the notion that maybe white people should feel uncomfortable, as their comfort is based largely on a system that discriminated (historically to the point of atrocity) against nonwhites.

Re: Gnome Foundation Welcomes Holly Million as Executive Director

#49

Post by lproven »

booleandilemma wrote: post #17
gustavus wrote: post #10

Looking at the qualifications and past experience of this pick I am starting to wonder what exactly was the rationale behind this? The only work history listed in her resume is as a consultant, and as "Holly Million the Shaman Artist". This will be interesting to say the least.

Her name sounds like something out of a William Gibson novel, for one.

I am glad it's not just me that thought of Saint Molly.

Re: Gnome Foundation Welcomes Holly Million as Executive Director

#50

Post by lproven »

josteink wrote: post #41
kbrosnan wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know it is cool to hate on Mitchell Baker here. Lack of qualifications is not a valid criticism. She has a law degree from Berkley. Passed the California bar exam in '87. Was a high ranking lawyer in Netscape as their first legal hire. Designed the Mozilla Public License. Created the Mozilla Foundation. She has been in executive roles for 20-30 years.

> Lack of qualifications is not a valid criticism. On the contrary I would consider that the absolutely most justified, objective criticism one could find. But then I’m one of those guys who thinks DEI (as preached by today’s social activists) is horseshit, and I think meritocracy is a good thing. I’m not sure how those things are seen from within, by people more left leaning than me.

> I think meritocracy is a good thing.

The term "meritocracy" was coined as a satirical parody of effective governance.

https://www.routledge.com/The-Rise-of-the-Meritocracy/Young/...

It was meant to be a negative, and is used as a pejorative: as a very bad idea that became effectively a swearword.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/41427674

Be careful what you wish for.

Post reply on HN